SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Novel multiport robotic systems versus da vinci multiport robotic system in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical and oncological outcomes.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic surgery is a game-changing innovation in urology. Novel multiport robotic systems’s (MRS) benefits and limitations in renal surgery when compared to Da Vinci MRS need to be fully understood. This study aims to identify variations from the well-known Da Vinci MRS in terms of surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes in patients undergoing robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). Our systematic review and meta-analysis screened Pubmed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases, analyzing data from eighteen papers. Of them, 6 studies compared RAPN outcomes in patients between the novel MRS and Da Vinci MRS. Surgical outcomes (surgical times, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, Clavien-Dindo grade > 2 complications rate) and oncological outcomes (positive surgical margins rate and trifecta achievement rate) were analyzed using a Sidik-Jonkman method in a random-effects model. The abovementioned eighteen studies involved and included 1204 patients (631 novel MRS and 573 Da Vinci). Six of them were comparative studies between novel MRS and Da Vinci. Meta-analysis between novel MRS and Da Vinci revealed statistically significant differences in terms of docking time (Mean Difference 1.95; 95% CI 0.41–3.5; I2 98.9%; p = 0.01) and console time (Mean Difference 16.72; 95% CI 5.1–28.4; I2 67.7%; p < 0.01). No other variations between the two systems were shown in terms of oncological or perioperative results. The present systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates similar surgical and clinical outcomes for RAPN conducted with the novel MRS and Da Vinci robotic platform, despite the small number of included studies. Novel MRS could be used in resource-limited hospital settings as alternative to Da Vinci MRS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.